Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62216/2023dismissed

Pappu Kumar Yadaw @ Pappu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-18Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62216 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-429 Year-2020 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== PAPPU KUMAR YADAW @ PAPPU YADAV son of Late Bharat Yadaw @ Majister Yadaw Village- Lakharaw Ps- Siwan Muffasil Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Siwan Mufassil P.S. Case No. 429 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. Co-accused, Umesh Kumar Yadav and Pappu Kumar Sah are said to have taken the son of the informant, shot dead and disappeared his body. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that there is delay of 17 days in lodging the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62216 of 2023(2) dt.18-10-2023 2/2 present F.I.R. without assigning any cogent reason for the said delay. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. His name has been transpired in the present case merely on suspicion during the course of investigation. There is no eye-witness in the present case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T